I'd be happy to share. In my mind The Creator has all knowledge and is the master of every skill that the creation possesses with attributes that the created can not comprehend. I come to my beliefs by asking myself the hard questions and determining from my knowledge base what could be true or is it possible. I believe strongly in the Creator's Love because of the beauty of Love. An unkind God would have made us a planet of awful things where there was no joy, beauty, freedom, compassion or love.

Once you have defined The Creator as Loving the rest just falls into place. If it's not Loving it is not true.

So asking yourself the hard questions and determining from your knowledge base what could be true or possible...

Quote

I believe strongly in the Creator's Hate because of the horrors of Hate. A kind God would have made us a planet of beautiful things where there was no suffering, death, slavery, egotism, or hatred.

Once you have defined The Creator as Hateful the rest just falls into place. If it's not Hateful it is not true.

In what manner did you discard the above possibility? Or did you discard that possibility?

Logged

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

Any Christian that claims homosexuality an abomination is following OT doctrine.

And is obeying Jesus - following his word exactly:

William,

A hyena eating a gazelle is hardly evil. That is the cycle of life.That's mankind killing those whales.I do not know the circumstances behind the dead humans. Is it from war or natural disaster?

If it is from war, that is in man's hands.

If it is natural disaster, from what we know about the planet, weather is a key element in our design.

We could build homes that do not crumble if it were not for excessive greed.

Quote

Matthew 5:17-18

17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

This was probably added by the author to protect his life. Jesus clearly did come to change the law or why even come. The whole story is Jesus denouncing the "old ways". The washing of hands, stoning, judging, long prayers in long robes. Even the simplest law of the Sabbath. I believe the author feared that he would suffer the same fate as Jesus if he did not change the message.

I want to preface this with a note that I wrote my first version a few hours ago and, when I was nearly finished, I accidentally closed the window. I am fairly calm now but if there seems to be any annoyance in what I have written below, please do not take it personally – it is a holdover from deleting what felt like a considerate and well worded response. Hopefully this is also one.

I thought most atheist knew that it's predated by several other beliefs, as do I....Source of ID=My own mindSource of Jesus=BibleSource of belief=My own mind

The core of my belief is very UNchristian, where was that in their analogy?

The ultimate source of anyone's belief does stem from within their own mind created by the slightly faulty agency detection system in our heads which does not rule out false positives as much as it should for good cognition. But few people know that and in everyday interactions they will look to social or knowledge based sources for the reason for other's beliefs. As such, saying you believe in ID = believing in the Bible as that is the source for ID. From Wiki:

Quote from: Wikipedia

Intelligent design (ID) is a form of creationism promulgated by the Discovery Institute, a politically conservative think tank based in the U.S. The Institute defines it as the proposition that "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." It is a contemporary adaptation of the traditional teleological argument for the existence of God, presented by its advocates as "an evidence-based scientific theory about life's origins" rather than "a religious-based idea". All the leading proponents of intelligent design are associated with the Discovery Institute and believe the designer to be the Christian deity.

Scientific acceptance of Intelligent Design would require redefining science to allow supernatural explanations of observed phenomena, an approach its proponents describe as theistic realism or theistic science. It puts forth a number of arguments in support of the existence of a designer, the most prominent of which are irreducible complexity and specified complexity. The scientific community rejects the extension of science to include supernatural explanations in favor of continued acceptance of methodological naturalism, and has rejected both irreducible complexity and specified complexity for a wide range of conceptual and factual flaws. Intelligent design is viewed as a pseudoscience by the scientific community, because it lacks empirical support, offers no tenable hypotheses, and aims to describe natural history in terms of scientifically untestable supernatural causes.

Intelligent design was developed by a group of American creationists who revised their argument in the creation–evolution controversy to circumvent court rulings such as the United States Supreme Court's Edwards v. Aguillard decision, which barred the teaching of "Creation Science" in public schools on the grounds of breaching the separation of church and state. The first publication of the phrase "intelligent design" in its present use as an alternative term for creationism was in Of Pandas and People, a 1989 textbook intended for high-school biology classes. From the mid-1990s, intelligent design proponents were supported by the Discovery Institute, which, together with its Center for Science and Culture, planned and funded the "intelligent design movement". They advocated inclusion of intelligent design in public school biology curricula, leading to the 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, where U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents", and that the school district's promotion of it therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

There is no other source for intelligent design. No other religion or belief system has anything close to ID. And the only way to (semi-)independently derive a personal version of ID is if the person buys into certain pseudoscience ideas like irreducible complexity and specified complexity – which have been shown to be false.

The most independent version of ID would be if the person rejected the religious teachings and pseudoscience junk but could not reject the idea of a creator and postulated that there must be a creator and it created this universe billions of years ago with all the natural forces set up to proceed on their own without need of any action on the creator's part.

There are two significant things about this creation concept. First, the creator is not God. The word 'god' when written capitalized signifies the god of the Bible – also referred to as Yahweh or Jehovah. Any other deity is referred to by name or by the generic "god", never by "God". (Except by sloppy writers/thinkers.) Second, there is ultimately no support for the idea of a creator beyond the flawed ideas by which all other gods are refuted.

I went through a similar period where I still thought there needed to be a creator but I had reached a point where I understood all the gods from all the religions were just a part of primitive man's attempt to understand the world. I realized that a creator needed to be intelligent to have created the universe; a stupid god could never have managed to understand, let alone come up with, the elegance of the four basic forces by which the universe functioned (Strong, Electromagnetic, Weak and Gravity). I realized that a creator would have to have an immense imagination larger than my own. I also realized that a creator would need to have the power to be able to will things into existence just upon thinking of them. I could think of so many things including multitudes of parallel universes. I came to the conclusion that anything I could think of, the creator could think of and more – and it could create them all.

This helped for a little while explain why there was suffering and evil in the world. In an infinity of infinities, anything and everything was possible. But then what was the creator really? The creator I had created in my head that seemed so much better than any of the gods of any religion still had flaws. There was no longer any observable difference between the multiverse with a creator and the (viewable) universe[1] without a creator. The creator had gotten spread out into nothingness and was gone.

I do envy you for being able to see your deity as Love. I don't want to rob you of that. I do want you to understand that the way you currently present your beliefs says to people you are a variant of a christian and your beliefs can be dismissed with theirs. So, for your sake, stop referring to your idea of the beginning of the universe as ID. Stop referring to "God". Find terms that better suit what you believe.

You are correct - you know where you belief comes from better than the rest of us. You say that it does not come from the bible; so far as I can tell, the only primary source for the existence of Jesus, the Jesus that has some relationship to god (not sure what you believe in that respect), is the bible.

It boils down to this: how did you learn about Jesus?Was it from the bible? Seems clearly that, in your case, the answer is 'no'.Was it from the people around you? If so, where did they there about Jesus? If not the bible, where?Was it from direct experience of Jesus in some form or another? If so, is it something you can describe?

Again, like you said, you know where your belief comes better than we do. Please help close the gap in understanding.

I think part of the problem is you don't understand the relationship I have with Jesus; I don't. I am not a Christian, a fact that I have repeatedly stated. I am open minded about the whole story. For me I have chosen to live a life of peace and love. I have found inspiration for that journey in the teachings of Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and many other non violent demonstrators.

Yes I can only use the bible for a source for Jesus. It is also the source of other Jewish history. It is a totally different read if you read it not believing it is divine/holy.

I will try to be more patient with you as you try to understand me. If this doesn't help I will try and try until you get me.

A hyena eating a gazelle is hardly evil. That is the cycle of life.That's mankind killing those whales.

Of course it's the cycle of life - newborn kids trembling with fear, bleating for their mothers while having their limbs ripped off by jaws that crunch through bones. The mother's of kids running around in fear and obviously filled with emotions of bereavement, making futile calls to make contact with their stolen kids. Basically what you'd expect from something evolved - not something created by a God overflowing with a sense of:" joy, beauty, freedom, compassion or love".

That is traditional whaling in Norway - practiced for many generations - the people would not have survived and thrived there without it - it is also the "cycle of life".It's an outdoor abattoir - the chickens, pigs, cattle, fish etc we eat all die in quite unpleasant ways to sustain humans. Are humans and their nutrition needs not part of the design?

I do not know the circumstances behind the dead humans. Is it from war or natural disaster?

If it is from war, that is in man's hands.

If it is natural disaster, from what we know about the planet, weather is a key element in our design.

We could build homes that do not crumble if it were not for excessive greed.

That is from the recent garment factory collapse in Bangladesh. Innocent victims of greed - no doubt about that. What God of "freedom" and "compassion" would sit by and watch those poor people crushed by steel and rubble and suffocating dust?

This was probably added by the author to protect his life. Jesus clearly did come to change the law or why even come.

Cute little dodge - anything Jesus is purported to have said that doesn't fit with your personal ideal hero version is declared invalid and worthy of ignoring This is what I call excusiology. A prime example of cherry picking in action.

Wouldn't a God with any sense have tried a bit harder to communicate accurately with it's creationlings? Why waste the effort of Jesus with uncoordinated and confusing marketing messages?

I think part of the problem is you don't understand the relationship I have with Jesus; I don't. I am not a Christian, a fact that I have repeatedly stated. I am open minded about the whole story. For me I have chosen to live a life of peace and love. I have found inspiration for that journey in the teachings of Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and many other non violent demonstrators.

I know this isn't addressed to me, but i have to say that you may not see yourself as a Christian, but you do have to realize that you would never have heard of Jesus if the Bible was never presented to you, ergo the teachings would not be from Jesus then. What you didn't realize is that the teachings of goodness and love is from humans, nothing special. You might already knew that of course, but the thing is, you are taking pieces of the Bible you want while rejecting most of it, as all other Christians do.

Quote

Yes I can only use the bible for a source for Jesus. It is also the source of other Jewish history. It is a totally different read if you read it not believing it is divine/holy.

What you might not realize is that the Old Testament is not the Christian doctrine, only the New. Jews did not believe in Jesus or the concepts of hell as Christians do. You might already knew this, but yet, despite that, you are saying you're a believer of intelligent design. Which strikes me curious when i read your first post. What exactly is it about the intelligent design you believe in? I for one think the world is never designed. Too many flaws within the human body doesn't make it sound like there's an intelligent design.

Quote

I will try to be more patient with you as you try to understand me. If this doesn't help I will try and try until you get me.

I've got to go for now. Take care. Have a good evening.

Well i am curious to understand you as well as i feel perplexed with your posts.

« Last Edit: June 25, 2013, 07:19:57 PM by Timtheskeptic »

Logged

Me:What are you looking at Eminem?Brother: Nothing, Harry Potter.

I love to read books, just not your Bible. i support gay rights and women's rights. Why? Because i'm tired of the hate, stupidity, and your desire to control us all and make up lies.

I think part of the problem is you don't understand the relationship I have with Jesus; I don't. I am not a Christian, a fact that I have repeatedly stated. I am open minded about the whole story. For me I have chosen to live a life of peace and love. I have found inspiration for that journey in the teachings of Jesus, Gandhi, Martin Luther King and many other non violent demonstrators.

Yes I can only use the bible for a source for Jesus. It is also the source of other Jewish history. It is a totally different read if you read it not believing it is divine/holy.

I will try to be more patient with you as you try to understand me. If this doesn't help I will try and try until you get me.

I've got to go for now. Take care. Have a good evening.

Thank you for being patient.

I'm going to try to summarize how I understand some of your beliefs. I think I'm still a little murky, so I'm bound to make some errors here so forgive that.

You take the bible to be an old book that has descriptions that are accurate (perhaps not precise), though it is neither a text of the quality of a history book (contains fantastical stories and untrue elements and events) nor a divinely written or inspired work. You believe that a divine entity 'Jesus' (not really sure about this one; I'm basing this off of your claims of having a current, active relationship with this entity) is, in some way, referenced in this book (either as The Messiah as described, as a character based upon the real 'Jesus' entity, or some other means). The information that you have on Jesus' character (be it concrete information or some 'intuitive' sense of knowing) is not informed by the bible, but rather informed through your life experiences as a whole.

The 'god' entity described in the bible is not related to the actual 'god' entity, or if so, it is a tangential relation at best (both biblegod and the 'god' you refer to as creators of the world for example).Questions at this point:Is there any way you can more specifically how it is you 'know', 'think', or 'intuit' this information you have regarding Jesus and/or god? A general descriptor of 'life experience' is difficult to simply accept - we all have life experiences, and we all have come to very different bits of mutually-exclusive information.

The world (is it fair to simply say 'reality' instead of 'the world'?) appears to be designed by some intelligent means, and this intelligent means necessarily stems from some sentience. This is enough to suggest to you that the best, most parsimonious explanation is that some intelligent sentience created, through undiscovered or undiscoverable means, instantiated the world and continues to act in it but inside the will of other sentient entities. This 'interaction' manifests itself as emotional and/or intuitive senses but not in some manner like direct interaction with the physical 'essence' (matter, energy, space, time, etc.).

Questions at this point:I think the obvious question is - surely by whatever criteria you deem as sufficient to claim the world/reality designed apply to the sentience proposed. In essence the answer simply rewords the question - replace 'world' or 'reality' with 'god' but nothing else of value is accomplished.

Further, I have a pretty big gap in understanding still as to how Jesus and god relate. Could you explain that? Start at a 'high-level' if you like and we can drill down into more detail if I'm still not quite understanding you.

Logged

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

Junebug's an apologist. but if this is discounted then everything can be. the Bible can't be trusted for what Jesus actually stated therefore Jesus stated nothing and therefore never existed. Junebug obviously supports this by her statement.

Quote

Jesus clearly did come to change the law or why even come.

To fulfill it?

Quote

The whole story is Jesus denouncing the "old ways".

How?

Quote

The washing of hands, stoning, judging, long prayers in long robes. Even the simplest law of the Sabbath. I believe the author feared that he would suffer the same fate as Jesus if he did not change the message.

I'm going to respond to jdawg, William, Samothec and Timtheskeptic with this post.

First welcome to the discussion Tim.

Jdawg, I clearly told you I do not have a relationship with Jesus. So why turn around and say that I do?

1st question-We all have life experiences but not the same ones. Mine has been very different from yours and so on and so on. I know you must be aware of this.

When you read the bible without belief in it's divinity/holiness it is a different read.

Why would you say that intelligence stems from sentience? I would think it the other way around. Sentience stems from intelligence.

2nd question-I believe Jesus was close to God. The authors of his story are human and their interpretation may be exaggerated. For instance, the virgin birth, walking on water, healing, rising from the dead and turning water into wine. See I am familiar with human nature and I don't know, when I read the bible with this in mind it stands out to me.

Jesus is so much greater as a man than a demi-god.

Timtheskeptic,

You will never understand me as long as you define me as a Christian. Just because I've been inspired by a few verses? That does not make me a Christian. It makes me inspired by a few verses.

This is for all of the above. It's like a need at this point to me for you to insist that I'm Christian. Do you think this would discredit me in some way? If you could just prove I'm Christian then my views are moot? I think that's what this is. I can think of no other reason why someone would insist I am what I say I am not.

I capitalize the name of God because it is a name. To show respect to the Creator. I have no other name. We are all familiar with this name.

William,

There is both beauty and blood in this world. The landscape being the most beautiful.

The antelope's mother will not grieve over her young as would a human. She continues to run away from the hyenas. She does not stay and fight them off. Yes other species will try to protect their young but it's not due to emotional attachment it is instinctual. I believe God spared the animals emotions because of their place in the cycle of life.

I've got to go for now. Having some pain in my biopsy area. Take care.

I believe God spared the animals emotions because of their place in the cycle of life.

Please Junebug72, I beg you go spend some real time with animals, or speak to some animal handlers. Animals are a bag of emotions - that's almost all they have really - emotions! Some of the more evolved animals have limited cognitive powers, however all but the most basic of creatures do not lack obvious emotions. Emotional systems are essential for their social interactions, and their reactive states to threats and opportunities such as rivals, predators, food and mates. Basically their survival depends on having the right emotional responses to relevant stimuli - emotions govern their behaviours. They also communicate emotions through body language, sounds and scents.

At the very least you should google studies about animals showing empathy.

Jdawg, I clearly told you I do not have a relationship with Jesus. So why turn around and say that I do?

Apologies - I misread/misunderstood what you had wrote. I read it as you saying that I don't understand the relationship you have with Jesus, and that you don't necessarily understand your relationship with him either (it's a viewpoint I've seen a number of times - claims of a personal relationship with Jesus but of a kind that cannot be articulated in any sort of way).

Quote

1st question-We all have life experiences but not the same ones. Mine has been very different from yours and so on and so on. I know you must be aware of this.

I'm not sure this addresses the meat of my question - yes, we do have very different experiences. The question is why there are so many disparate, mutually exclusive viewpoints and understandings on a subject like 'the existence of an person called Jesus' and the nature of that entity therein (i.e. divinity, salvation, simple preacher, etc.). That's why I'm saying that simply saying "my life experiences have informed upon me that Jesus of Nazareth existed and had the following qualities" is insufficient to understand how it is you came to believe that Jesus did indeed exist.

Quote

When you read the bible without belief in it's divinity/holiness it is a different read.

Yup.

Quote

Why would you say that intelligence stems from sentience? I would think it the other way around. Sentience stems from intelligence.

I suspect that neither of us will get very far if we start trying to define intelligence in a specific way, so I'll go ahead and just concede this. With the assumption that sentience stems from intelligence, what leads you to leap that the intelligence that you feel is apparent in the creation of reality has sentient characteristics (i.e. loving, willfulness, etc.)?

Quote

2nd question-I believe Jesus was close to God. The authors of his story are human and their interpretation may be exaggerated. For instance, the virgin birth, walking on water, healing, rising from the dead and turning water into wine. See I am familiar with human nature and I don't know, when I read the bible with this in mind it stands out to me.

Jesus is so much greater as a man than a demi-god.

So when you say "Jesus was close to god", I take it to mean that Jesus was more 'in tuned' to god, or has a better understanding of god's ways more than others? Or something like that at least...if you could give more clarity here I think it would help...

I'm going to try a re-summary of how I understand your views and beliefs again. Same caveats apply from last time:

You take the bible to be an old book that has some historical descriptions that are accurate (perhaps not precise), though it is neither a text of the quality of a history book (contains fantastical stories and untrue elements and events) nor a divinely written or inspired work. You believe that man named 'Jesus' is, in some way, referenced in this book, though for the most part is a caricature of the actual 'Jesus'. The information that you have on Jesus' character (be it concrete information or some 'intuitive' sense of knowing) is not informed by the bible, but rather informed through your life experiences as a whole.

The man Jesus is an ideal to aspire towards. Actions and words attributed to him in the bible may or may not be accurate, but again, the truth of his existence and aspects of his general character are things that you've learned of through life experiences as a whole.

The 'god' entity described in the bible is not related to the actual 'god' entity, or if so, it is a tangential relation at best (both biblegod and the 'god' you refer to as creators of the world for example).

The world (is it fair to simply say 'reality' instead of 'the world'?) appears to be designed by some intelligent means. This is enough to suggest to you that the best, most parsimonious explanation is that some intelligent sentience created, through undiscovered or undiscoverable means, instantiated the world and continues to act in it but inside the will of other sentient entities. This 'interaction' manifests itself as emotional and/or intuitive senses but not in some manner like direct interaction with the physical 'essence' (matter, energy, space, time, etc.).

Questions:I'm still unclear as to how you've derived some aspects of Jesus' character or teachings. If none of it is informed from the bible (and maybe some of it is), where do you get your ideas that Jesus is an exemplary example of a human to strive to be like? Where do you get your idea that Jesus is, in some way, close to god?

Could you explain how you get from 'reality looks to be designed by an intelligence' to 'the intelligence responsible for designing reality has sentience'? The gap there is a bit wide for me right now. Does sentience necessarily stem from intelligence?

Logged

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

I believe God spared the animals emotions because of their place in the cycle of life.

Please Junebug72, I beg you go spend some real time with animals, or speak to some animal handlers. Animals are a bag of emotions - that's almost all they have really - emotions! Some of the more evolved animals have limited cognitive powers, however all but the most basic of creatures do not lack obvious emotions. Emotional systems are essential for their social interactions, and their reactive states to threats and opportunities such as rivals, predators, food and mates. Basically their survival depends on having the right emotional responses to relevant stimuli - emotions govern their behaviours. They also communicate emotions through body language, sounds and scents.

At the very least you should google studies about animals showing empathy.

I concur William, animals are capable of empathy and emotions June, and we as human beings descended from common ancestors with apes, we're animals too and with emotions and empathy. No animal were "spared of emotions." We're all part of the way of life as with the rest of the animal kingdom.

Logged

Me:What are you looking at Eminem?Brother: Nothing, Harry Potter.

I love to read books, just not your Bible. i support gay rights and women's rights. Why? Because i'm tired of the hate, stupidity, and your desire to control us all and make up lies.

I'm going to respond to jdawg, William, Samothec and Timtheskeptic with this post.

First welcome to the discussion Tim.

Why thank you, June.

Quote

Timtheskeptic,

You will never understand me as long as you define me as a Christian. Just because I've been inspired by a few verses? That does not make me a Christian. It makes me inspired by a few verses.

Actually i think it does, but i am capable of understanding you so don't put words in my mouth. What it seems like June is that you decided that some parts of the Bible is worth listening to such as the teachings of Jesus.

Quote

This is for all of the above. It's like a need at this point to me for you to insist that I'm Christian. Do you think this would discredit me in some way?

It's not to discredit you, but it seem like you are trying to split apart what you want to have away from religion. Kind of like trying to take out Darth Vader from Star Wars or Gandalf from Lord of the Rings.

Quote

If you could just prove I'm Christian then my views are moot? I think that's what this is. I can think of no other reason why someone would insist I am what I say I am not.

Enlighten me June, i know you said that you do listen to other teachings as well that you feel agreeable to. The thing is, you believe in the bible or at least what some things have been said.

Quote

The antelope's mother will not grieve over her young as would a human. She continues to run away from the hyenas. She does not stay and fight them off. Yes other species will try to protect their young but it's not due to emotional attachment it is instinctual. I believe God spared the animals emotions because of their place in the cycle of life.

Animals do have emotions and empathy. I suggest taking more closer look at the animals. Do you have any pets June? They do show characteristics of emotions and empathy. While i don't think one should anthropomorphize animals with human characteristics, they do however feel empathy and emotions. We as human beings are animals as well and the reason we seem more advanced is because of our capacity to reason.

Logged

Me:What are you looking at Eminem?Brother: Nothing, Harry Potter.

I love to read books, just not your Bible. i support gay rights and women's rights. Why? Because i'm tired of the hate, stupidity, and your desire to control us all and make up lies.

Jdawg, I don't know how you misunderstood,"I do not have a relationship with Jesus." I understand that, I'm sorry you do not. I haven't failed to explain it, others understand. Their minds are not clouded with fog.

I have seen enough documentaries to know the mother antelope keeps running. I have never seen an animal outside the human race cry. I've heard a domesticated dog whine for his master but I've never seen tears. I don't deny animals have some feelings but they are not as strong as human emotions.

William please learn how to properly apply the word dodge, I didn't dodge you I gave you my interpretation of your pictures. It's not very nice to say someone did something they didn't do. I will not do this to you so please do not do it to me.

This is no different from me saying they really believe they just say they don't. I could say what I want about you, it does not make it true. If I say I do not base my belief on the bible, I do not, and I find it most arrogant for any of you to say otherwise. If my belief was bible based I would believe I was condemned to hell along with everybody here.

Do I agree with some of Jesus's teachings, yes I do. I believe in some Buddhist teachings, I believe in some Native American teachings. There is plenty of sources that influence my belief. What I find critical is that I consider the consequences and not follow blindly.

Ancient Toltec knowledge is what I live my life by. Take that and really stick it in your ear.

I am not a liar.

I did not call you a liar. You just simply dont know about what youre talking about.Whether Jesus existed or not is immaterial to where you got your belief in him from. Fact still remains that the only places to get this Jesus myth are holy books, namely the bible. ITS THE ONLY PLACE. So if you believe in Jesus you get it from the bible (or Koran I suppose) plain and simple. Now, you may have cherry picked other religions like you do Christianity, but that doesnt make you any less a Christian (someone who believes in the Jesus myth).

Jesus didnt come to you. You didnt learn about "Jesus' teachings" in a history book. You either got them from the bible, or someone else who got them from the bible. I'm going to insist that you think critically.

William please learn how to properly apply the word dodge, I didn't dodge you I gave you my interpretation of your pictures. It's not very nice to say someone did something they didn't do. I will not do this to you so please do not do it to me.

Okay let's rewind the tape a bit and have a look at it. But first let me say I admire the way you've stayed in the conversation and kept up with so many people posting. I thank you for that and admire your tenacity and effort.

However, I think we got our signals a bit crossed here because the "dodge" in question was not in relation to the pictures I posted

Straight after the pictures in post #51 (which even I find confronting) I made another post #52 dealing with a separate issue from your statement in post #50, i.e.:

Any Christian that claims homosexuality an abomination is following OT doctrine.

In response to that I gave you Matthew 5:17-18. This to me is like a killer bazooka rocket shot to any argument claiming the old testament is "old". Jesus (if we are to believe in him) is saying emphatically that the old testament is valid in every respect - every jot and tittle! There is no way I can see to interpret that other than literally. And btw if that is not convincing enough I can add the idea that God himself didn't change between the OT and the NT - it must be the same sky daddy before and after. So Jesus is right to say God's laws from before are applicable at that time (there was no NT till many decades later) and into the future to the end of the universe.

How can a moral concept about homosexuality conveyed by God himself suddenly change because a fragment of God turned up as Jesus? It can't - do you agree? The writings about Jesus may have added a kinder approach and some additional wisdom to the story - but Jesus can't contradict God i.e. himself and still be the same God as before.

So now in response to my retort using Matthew 5:17-18 your reply in post #59 was:

This was probably added by the author to protect his life. Jesus clearly did come to change the law or why even come. The whole story is Jesus denouncing the "old ways". The washing of hands, stoning, judging, long prayers in long robes. Even the simplest law of the Sabbath. I believe the author feared that he would suffer the same fate as Jesus if he did not change the message.

(See how this is nothing to do with the pictures - don't worry I do not blame you for getting confused or getting upset with me due to the misunderstanding - you're showing a lot of courage to stand up to so many atheists simultaneously.)

This is a different part of our exchange and there is indeed a very cute little dodge executed by you when you bring in the excusiology that the "author" might write something untrue about Jesus because the "author" was in fear. How convenient hey!? Next print of the Bible should have a little asterisk with a footnote saying: "Junebug grants you permission to ignore this verse."

It fails to address the problem that God = God(+Jesus), before and after.

There is no basis for saying the author was in fear, and so changed what he/she is reporting Jesus to have said. There is also no basis for saying Jesus would lie at that point because he may have been in fear - his mission on earth was to get slayed for telling the truth, not to dodge a bullet and confuse everyone thereafter.

But wait, we are now debating about the contorted contradictory plot of a fictional work as if it were true and consistent. I agree with your proposition in the OP that: "The Bible is a disgrace to God!!!"

But I take it one step further: "The fictional Yahweh character is a disgrace to humankind, and a disgrace to some of the wonderful ideas developed by the early Jesus cult - which some authors decades later sought to embellish with their own philosophies and weave into the Yahweh myth for consumption by the superstitious people of that era."

Jesus was probably a very nice guy. It's a pity his story is forever hijacked and infected by the filthy myth of Yahweh.

Jdawg, I don't know how you misunderstood,"I do not have a relationship with Jesus." I understand that, I'm sorry you do not.

I did attempt to explain the source of my misunderstanding. If that explanation is unsatisfactory we can just go with "I'm stupid" - I'm more than fine with admitting that.

Did I get the rest of my summation of your beliefs right, or even in the ballpark?

Logged

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

I'm going to respond to jdawg, William, Samothec and Timtheskeptic with this post....This is for all of the above. It's like a need at this point to me for you to insist that I'm Christian. Do you think this would discredit me in some way? If you could just prove I'm Christian then my views are moot? I think that's what this is. I can think of no other reason why someone would insist I am what I say I am not.

I capitalize the name of God because it is a name. To show respect to the Creator. I have no other name. We are all familiar with this name.

Seriously? This is your response to my post (#60 above)? Sigh. It's like you didn't even read it - at all. In fact, I can't see anything that supports the idea that you read it since I explained what you question here. I had begun to think there was a chance to talk and reason with you. Now, not so much.

Logged

Faith must trample under foot all reason, sense, and understanding. - Martin Luther

I'm curious to know why you think that your god was not able to exercise any editorial control over the content of the Bible. Let's say that someone tried to publish a book entitled Junebug: Child Molester; Cannibal filled with false accusations of "your" brutality and lists of atrocities you "committed." I think it is very safe to say that you would act to the extent of your abilities to prevent such a book from being published (sue the author and publishers for libel, etc.) or at the very least do all in your power to get an indisputably accurate response out. An entity capable of crafting bacterial flagella (and pretty much everything else) would almost certainly be capable of either preventing a few misguided humans from misrepresenting his nature, or providing a counter-argument that was indisputably from him. Given that you define him as "loving" in addition to being "an Intelligent Designer," that leads to the anticipated consequence that he would not want the humans he seeks to love to be terrified of him or become convinced that he's a monster. So why do you think that he was not able to employ his intelligence and capabilities to finding a solution to "the Bible Problem?"

quote author=Nam link=topic=25104.msg560513#msg560513 date=1372248757]Junebug's an apologist. but if this is discounted then everything can be. the Bible can't be trusted for what Jesus actually stated therefore Jesus stated nothing and therefore never existed. Junebug obviously supports this by her statement..[/quote]

You would have to read it in the same mind frame as I did to understand that. There is always truth and fiction possible in those stories. I try to distinguish the two

Quote

Jesus clearly did come to change the law or why even come.

Quote

NAM-To fulfill it?

To change it, and he did.

Quote

The whole story is Jesus denouncing the "old ways".

Quote

Nam-How?

I'm not going to read it for you. Matt. 23:1-39, that's one example, and there are others. When the crowd pickedup their stones to throw at the prostitute Jesus said let the first man here w/o sin throw the first stone.

Quote

The washing of hands, stoning, judging, long prayers in long robes. Even the simplest law of the Sabbath. I believe the author feared that he would suffer the same fate as Jesus if he did not change the message.

Quote

I never said to obey Jesus. Not sure Jesus did either.

Quote

Nam-John 14:23-Nam

All I heard Jesus say was to keep my words, We all agree that hasn't been done. The words are twisted to suit the needs and desires of man. That's why they're fruit is rotten.

The words are simple, love one another as I have loved you. Forgive and be forgiven.

Well there's more on my ideas of how Christianity does not fulfill the Love of Jesus.

When the crowd pickedup their stones to throw at the prostitute Jesus said let the first man here w/o sin throw the first stone.

This not overturning God's established laws, only changing who should enforce them. Jesus didn't say it's morally wrong to stone a prostitute, he only put the spotlight on the hypocrisy of people who wanted to stone her.

The problem I see with this passage is that Jesus didn't obey his Father (also himself), because Jesus was apparently without sin, so should've obeyed himself and chucked the first rock himself. He actually invited anyone without sin to chuck away - but didn't do it himself. I wonder what sin Jesus had committed that excluded himself from righteous rock chucking - by his own standards?

Why would you be so gullible as to believe anything the bible says? It's all hear-say. You don't know for sure there even WAS a Jesus, let alone that he actually said any of those things. This is just credulity.

]I did not call you a liar. You just simply dont know about what youre talking about.Whether Jesus existed or not is immaterial to where you got your belief in him from. Fact still remains that the only places to get this Jesus myth are holy books, namely the bible. ITS THE ONLY PLACE. So if you believe in Jesus you get it from the bible (or Koran I suppose) plain and simple. Now, you may have cherry picked other religions like you do Christianity, but that doesnt make you any less a Christian (someone who believes in the Jesus myth).

Jesus didnt come to you. You didnt learn about "Jesus' teachings" in a history book. You either got them from the bible, or someone else who got them from the bible. I'm going to insist that you think critically.

I am talking about myself. I know me pretty darn good. I have not denied that my knowledge of Jesus, real or not, derives from the bible. You are the one that can not figure out how to think outside the box. .

You are all like" Christianity bible god is so wicked and puny so god does not exist." BS! Christians, Jesus's followers, fail at the love, and judge not parts, so God does not exist. Well for a critical thinker as myself, I say that's pretty lame evidence for such an humongerous mystery. I say all the stories of ancient past are strange but they have one thing in common. They believed there was a power out of our control that we depend on for our existence. An Awesome, Intelligent Power that produces life. They came up with rituals, religions and traditions to honor the Source of life. Seems history tells us that the rituals, religions and traditions were in vain for most. Then there comes the Christian Religion. Very profitable and deceivingly moral. It still boils down to human opinions.

My opinion is that the Source of our life Loves us and is bound by celestial laws that we are not aware of. The laws that make time and space possible.I feel the spirit inside of my fleshly walls. I feel connected with The Source of life and when I am free of this flesh I will return to that same source to be held accountable for my life; justly and fairly. I have no idea what heaven is, for me it would be my family and friends there making music, dancing on stars and helping on earth if that's allowed. As awesome as earth is I Imagine Heaven way more glorious, splentastical, than earth. Maybe it's an earth without all the suffering of this one. No pain, sadness, hunger, poverty, death! For the greedy and violent ones another round of this earth.

See I look at it like this. I take the best of mankind's qualities multiply x's 10,000,000 or more and that's God to me.

I am talking about myself. I know me pretty darn good. I have not denied that my knowledge of Jesus, real or not, derives from the bible. You are the one that can not figure out how to think outside the box. .

If you know the bible is BS why would you take your Jesus belief from it? There is nothing to think outside the box about. Thinking outside the box has nothing to do with whether the bible has ANY truth to it at all. You have an unreliable book, you should treat the ENTIRE thing with extreme skepticism. You have not done that with your Jesus belief (though I do applaud you for at least admitting its unknown whether he existed).

Quote

You are all like" Christianity bible god is so wicked and puny so god does not exist." BS! Christians, Jesus's followers, fail at the love, and judge not parts, so God does not exist. Well for a critical thinker as myself, I say that's pretty lame evidence for such an humongerous mystery. I say all the stories of ancient past are strange but they have one thing in common. They believed there was a power out of our control that we depend on for our existence. An Awesome, Intelligent Power that produces life. They came up with rituals, religions and traditions to honor the Source of life. Seems history tells us that the rituals, religions and traditions were in vain for most. Then there comes the Christian Religion. Very profitable and deceivingly moral. It still boils down to human opinions.

No, you got the argument ALL WRONG. Yes the god of the bible is wicked and equally puny and worthless, but that is not evidence of its non-existence. Evidence for its non-existence is that it has literally zero measurable affect on the REAL world. The descriptions of the bible god contradict themselves, thus it is EASY to disregard its existence as easy as it is to disregard the existence of a married bachelor or nine sided square. By definition it cannot exist. Since Jesus is bible god, himself and his dad, and we know bible god doesn't exist...........

The reason ancient people believed in gods is because they didn't know stuff. Things they didn't know were caused by gods until they knew about them. Bad weather? gods did it. But you already in the other thread admitted that weather was due to natural causes. Why would you accept the scribblings of people who would be no more informed than today's first grader as some sort of authority on anything, especially in the face of facts to the contrary?

I understand your disdain for Christianity, but believing in Jesus makes one what? I'll let you answer.

Quote

My opinion is that the Source of our life Loves us and is bound by celestial laws that we are not aware of. The laws that make time and space possible.I feel the spirit inside of my fleshly walls. I feel connected with The Source of life and when I am free of this flesh I will return to that same source to be held accountable for my life; justly and fairly. I have no idea what heaven is, for me it would be my family and friends there making music, dancing on stars and helping on earth if that's allowed. As awesome as earth is I Imagine Heaven way more glorious, splentastical, than earth. Maybe it's an earth without all the suffering of this one. No pain, sadness, hunger, poverty, death! For the greedy and violent ones another round of this earth.

See I look at it like this. I take the best of mankind's qualities multiply x's 10,000,000 or more and that's God to me.

Here you are doing EXACTLY what the writers of the bible are doing, until you can demonstrate this stuff I have no reason to pay it any more credence than I do the bible. It all sounds like non-sense when you apply it to the real world. You have simply just typed out The Bible According to Junebug or The Book of Junebug, no difference.

You are all like" Christianity bible god is so wicked and puny so god does not exist." BS! Christians, Jesus's followers, fail at the love, and judge not parts, so God does not exist.

NOPE. We haven't said this AT-ALL. So you are misrepresenting our position. What we have said is that there is no good reason for thinking there is a god and that the time to believe a claim is AFTER sufficient evidence has been demonstrated (and not before). Please get our position right next time.

Regarding the Yahweh god of the bible, yes, many of us have argued that this god cannot exist (due to the fact that it holds simultaneously self-contradictory traits, such as perfect justice and perfect mercy, or being all-powerful but allowing evil).

Then there comes the Christian Religion. Very profitable and deceivingly moral. It still boils down to human opinions.

Wrong again. On the contrary, it DOES NOT just come down to opinion. What IT comes down to is the difference between those who are credulous and believe things on bad/no evidence vs. those who wait until the evidence comes in (and what can be demonstrated) before making any judgments, at all.

Christianity moral?

Teaching people (including children) to be intolerant of homosexuals (or anyone who disagrees)Teaching people (including children) that sex before marriage means God is mad at you (shame)Teaching children to ignore scientific evidence and "just have faith" in JesusGiving people a false hope that God will answer their prayers (amputees, cancer patients, etc)Teaching people that condom use is a sin, and evilRationalizing endless wars/violence/inquisitions, etcTeaching people that the end is near (Jesus will return soon) and to not care about tomorrowPropagating and promoting the disregard for evidence with the rationalization of "faith"

I feel the spirit inside of my fleshly walls. I feel connected with The Source of life and when I am free of this flesh I will return to that same source to be held accountable for my life; justly and fairly.

Feelings are not truth, and just because you think you "feel" something doesn't, in any way, mean you are correct in your interpretation of what you think you are feeling. This is why we have demonstrable science, with the use of critical reason and evidence, in order to separate fact from fiction. Making a self-prognosis doesn't do anything but prop up your own personal biases. Once again, you are quite mistaken. It is NOT just all about opinions. Separating fact from fiction often requires hard work, dedication, attention to detail, peer review, critical thinking, and checking for confirmation bias. Are you doing any of these things in order to protect yourself from false positives? It doesn't seem so.